"Soul Sufficiency"???

I believe they may have been referring to, and I am not certain, that the soul is all sufficient to understand Scripture. There is a half truth in this and it is related to the Priesthood of the believer. In history, this is true in that we do not need a priest. However, some liberals have made it to say that the Bible could have various interpretations. Some conservatives use it to grant hyper-autonomy, where we only need the Bible and on a deserted island. This is paramount to the doctrine of Solo Scriptura (a very popular doctrine on this board), not Sola Scriptura. Solo Scriptura essentially tells others there is no need for the church or to rely upon others now and throughout history for their doctrine. Sola Scriptura says that Scripture is the sole authority, but that we need to rely upon the church and Godly people throughout history to help us understand the Scripture.

Thus, usually when a phrase like the one mentioned is used, I normally avoid it.

 

The term, I believe, is actually soul competency.

The idea being we are each individually accountable before God. It has been best formulated in the works of EY Mullins.

Unfortunately the idea, while okay in its original formations, has been corrupted and is not helpful in understanding our relationship to each other and before God. It's like the deplorable work on "priesthood of the believer" (it actually should be "priesthood of all believers) where it isolates the individual Christian and forgets that there is a covenantal community of which we are a part and responsible.